The Writings of John: A Survey of the Gospel, Epistles, and Apocalypse by C. Marvin Pate

The Writings of John: A Survey of the Gospel, Epistles, and Apocalypse Reviews

• 
  Joshua

  This is a difficult writing to assess for a number of reasons. When I first came to this book I had a great deal of excitement because I knew of Dr. Pate and was hoping to glean from his years of experience. Unfortunately, I am sad to say that this book did not at all live up to expectations. Here are a few thoughts about the sections of this books.
  
  The first part begins with his assessment on the Gospel of John. It is generalized but excellent for textbook material. He essentially summarizes quite a bit of John and makes sparse comments about particular passages. I agree with another reviewer who noted his inability to take a position on a number of issues. There is little in his notes that is original but that is not the objective of this book. It is a survey of John's writings and would be good for introduction.
  
  I appreciate the Author's conservative stance on Johannine authorship even though at times it feels like he wants to defect to the Bultmann viewpoint. Nevertheless, he stays true to the idea that John the Apostle is the base for all the teachings and traditions contained in the book. I think where he begins to create confusion is whenever the subject of eschatology comes into play. I am not sure what he was trying to say at times and I get the impression that he didn't either. At the present I did not read the small section on the epistles as I am saving that for a future date. I will come back and adjust the review at that time.
  
  The book of Revelation was a travesty to scholarship everywhere. He tried to create his own hybrid view by combining elements of the preterist, the idealist and the futurist view into his own "eclectic" view. It did not work! I have read a lot of works of eschatology before but never encountered one that was so full of confusion. I kept reading hoping that he would clarify himself but much to my chagrin he did not. There were good nuggets buried throughout but the whole system was not working. He talked about how Jerusalem's fall was the template for the destruction of Rome which he describes in one place as already fallen while in another he describes as future. In one place for example he states that Domitian is the Antichrist and cites chapter 17 as proof. He says that Domitian is the eighth beast that "was not." The only problem is that there is more to that passage which he does not elaborate on such as the part that says "is, and was not and will be." I could not decide whether the 144,000 was past or future in his mind. He thinks that Nero Revived was supposed to lead a Parthian Army across the Euphrates and then states that Domitian was Nero Revived so when did that happen? He thinks the ten Kings are ten Roman Kings in succession even though he has to discount the year that there were four which I personally find embarrassing. This list goes on and on. To tell you the truth when I finished I did not know whether Christ was coming or going.
  
  I feel bad about giving this such a negative review. It has good points and I have no doubt that Dr. Pate is very bright. He needs to go ahead and defect to preterism because it is obviously in his heart and it is not easy gaining the approval of the academic "mucky-mucks" while holding to a futurist viewpoint. It has nuggets of good and it is worth having but it is frustrating, confusing and disappointing in many ways. It was a good idea reviewing the books of John together but it was executed quite imperfectly.
• 
  Kevin Riner

  This was a textbook for a class on John. I loved this book!